This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - eric922
« on: December 17, 2012, 04:39:42 PM »
Take this with a grain of salt because I'm only some guy on the internet, but if you can score in the 170's don't waste it on Cooley. This is a great time to be a spilter and with a 170 you could get into the T14. UVA is pretty friendly to spilters who enroll via their early decision program. Honestly, Cooley is ranked bad for a reason. It will be extremely hard for you to get a job coming out of Cooley. Your in Michigan right? The university of Michigan has a good law school and that degree would serve you much better than Cooley. Your first job prospects are highly dependent on where you get into school so I cannot recommend you go to Cooley.
« on: December 15, 2012, 07:45:13 PM »
Do you have an LSAT score yet? That's going to be an even bigger factor than your GPA. Assuming that you can successfully raise you GPA to 3.5, you'd probably need to score around 170 to have a shot at NYU or Cornell. No small task.
Not yet. I'm studying hard for it. I realize its an uphill battle, but I realize I'll need at least a 170 for any of the T14 so that's what I'm setting as my goal.
« on: December 15, 2012, 05:55:40 PM »
Also, I believe that only courses taken before the receipt of your first bachelors degree count.
Yeah I will need to check with my school about deferring graduation As to other NYC schools I was thinking of Cornell. I was wondering for work in NYC would a T14 be better than say Fordham or St. John's? I'm not sure about biglaw but I'd like the option.
« on: December 15, 2012, 02:55:50 PM »
I've played around with a LSAC GPA calculator and found that my GPA in Fall of 2013 would be 3.33. My dream school is NYU which has the their 25th percentile in the 3.5 range. I was thinking of waiting to apply till 2014 and spend the year in between working and take easy online courses to get my GPA up into the 3.5 range. I'm just wondering is this a feasible plan or do law schools not like when people pad their GPA? My goal is the top 14, but NYU is my dream since I want to work and live in NYC one day.
« on: December 09, 2012, 12:37:52 AM »
I don't think most law school applications ask about that. And, at least for CA, the state bar questionnaire asks about fitness to practice law. I'd be extremely surprised if, absent other circumstances, a history of depression alone caused any eyebrow raising at the moral character and fitness committee. A recent DUI, on the other hand...
To be frankly honest I would be shocked as well. I mean attempted suicide is a big deal, but given the circumstances and the amount of time that will have passed without any mental health problems I can't imagine how any state bar would decide a decade old incident would make me unfit to currently practice law. To me that would be extremely, well, unjust.
« on: December 09, 2012, 12:21:01 AM »
I have this coming spring semester, summer, and the following fall semester to go and will be able to graduate at the end of the Fall 2013 semester.. Assuming everything goes well my GPA at the start of next fall will be a 3.22, at the end of the next fall semester it will be a 3.33. I know this is a hypothetical and depends on me getting all A's, but I'm really more interested in opinions on applying late or early due to rolling admissions. I'll take the LSAT in June and if I do good enough I was planning on sending out early applications to schools in September due to rolling admissions. Would the extra GPA points be worth applying late or is it too small of a difference to matter?
« on: December 08, 2012, 11:57:59 PM »
One of the lawyers my dad works for was a JAG officer in the Marines, but I don't think he ever served before that and he says they paid off his student loans, but this was years ago so things may have changed a lot since then.
« on: December 08, 2012, 10:53:09 PM »
6. Briefs are mostly a waste of time, how they're usually done.
While I agree that case briefs can be a waste of time, I think it is useful to be able to summarize a case into bullet points, or a sentence or two. Otherwise, how will you remember the case and refer to it on an exam. Some of my professors did not care whether or not cases were referred to on an exam so long as black letter law was applied. However, some professors required thoughtful examination of cases and direct fact-to-fact comparisons on exams to get above a B. So, I don't know of any way to summarize the relevant facts and holdings of cases than to brief them. Albeit, my case briefs were always very short.
Quite right. This depends, of course, on the subject. Civ Pro or Constitutional Law will involve cases more extensively than other subjects, and of course some professors want more cases while others want a case name + an analysis that shows you know why that case name should be there.
One key is to think of case "briefs" in the same way that attorneys do. These are not 1-2 page monstrosities that law students are told to do, but are *very* short statements of the legal rule of the case. Wentworth Miller, of LEEWS, has written about the "2-4 line case brief," which he graciously allowed me to include in Law School: Getting In....
Actually I think it *is* good at the beginning of first year to spend 1-2 hours on a case brief . . . to understand how pointless it is. From there, move to a statement of the legal rule, asking "why is this case here?" If you can answer that, you'll understand why it's important and be able to use that to practice your exams (which you should do much, much more extensively than briefing).
On the topic of case briefs, I find them extremely tedious. I'm taking constitutional law and criminal law in the political science undergrad department and I loathe case briefs. My Con. law professor is the best professor I've ever had at my university, but the way he requires us to make briefs is extremely tedious. It takes me an hour for a single case. He says it was the way he did it at Vanderbilt in the 60's, but I really can't see it working for me. My criminal law professor was just recently in law school and he has a much more streamlined way to make briefs, but I still find it a bit tedious. Oh, and don't get me started on appellate briefs. I've done one and it made me want to scream. I love the law, but I hate briefing cases.
« on: December 08, 2012, 09:16:57 PM »
Thanks for all the advice guys. I feel a lot better about it now. I don't know if law school applications ask about mental health history or not, but if they do I'll be sure to disclose it and I'll certainly disclose it during the character and fitness portion when applying for the Bar.
« on: December 05, 2012, 04:15:10 PM »
Your military experience might give you a boost in admissions. Also you would need to write an addendum to explain your GPA. I know some schools really like work experience so that could help as well. I have one more question, have you taken the LSAT yet and do you think you could do better if you retook it? If so, you should seriously consider studying hard and retaking. I am not saying this to be rude or anything, because my GPA isn't great, but purely from a numbers standpoint your GPA is really poor and a good LSAT would go a long way to overcoming that. To illustrate my point, I've heard stories of people with 2.4s and 175s getting into T14 law schools. I'm not saying you need to go a T14 at all,(in fact considering that you have a family to take care of, it might be a bad idea to go to a T14 due to debt and having to move) but I'm just using to show the importance of your LSAT score.